Rank requirments, odd quests that don't mesh with the applicant's role or personality etc?

All this before even taking the time to talk to them.

Just curious. Get's tedious when I've had a dozen or so characters in the cabal before and have to keep doing this.

Pledges applicant's and blood oaths can actually participate in retrievals and raids if authorized (similar to Tribunal Deputize) to do so by a person in their potential cabal.

authorize <pledge name> raid

When authorized they can use the cabal channel.

The affect only last until the item is retrieved or downed.

That could help assess a pledge under true to game life preasures.

If the CF forums had a like button, ala Facebook, I'd use it. That being said, I think this is a good idea.

We have enough of loewbie retrievals as it is now. Let heroes do their work instead of sitting on their ass in guilds.

I've never seen it in any cabal. Unless they are faced with overwhelming odds, they come.

Like app said later in the thread, just boot the bad or ineffectual apples. Then if they stick with it and want to get back in, give them the hour long interview.

I swear. Why am I not a leader?

By design, some cabals work that way (easy in/out) and some don't. We're trying to make everyone happy!

The only cabal that shouldn't be easy in is Scion. Not only because of their cabal policies, but because of the cabal powers they get--which are some really nice ones.

Easy in, easy out works the best. It's just too many people in "leadership" spots are too pussified to actually boot people.

Leaders should boot more.

But then we'd have a whole different age of whining. Let's face it, we're whiners(vets mostly).

>Easy in, easy out works the best. It's just too many people in
>"leadership" spots are too pussified to actually boot people.

And when they actually do boot people it turns into a giant drama/whinefest that smells more of OOC than anything IC, leading to massive meltdowns, Nelson pointing and saying 'Hah Hah', and generally stupidity.

Easy in means everyone thinks they are entitled to it, and when easy out happens, they will spend their time bitching and moaning, complaining about why they shouldn't have ever been booted, demanding to know who/why they got booted, then lawyering every point instead of actually roleplaying anything.

No thanks.

So long, and thanks for all the fish!

If you make it known that you're that type of leader...easy in, easy out. People will already be predisposed to that type of action. And it probably wouldn't hurt the person who is said type of leader to give a warning before just laying down the axe...A simple, "Hey, I don't think you're putting forth sufficient effort. Consider this your first and only warning." Or word it so that it is consistent with your roleplay.

I think that would stifle a lot of whining.

>I think that would stifle a lot of whining.

My experience on CF staff leads me to believe this is a lot too optimistic.

I'm not opposed to a mortal leader taking that approach, but based on what I've seen I wouldn't do it.

>
>>I think that would stifle a lot of whining.
>
>My experience on CF staff leads me to believe this is a lot
>too optimistic.
>
>I'm not opposed to a mortal leader taking that approach, but
>based on what I've seen I wouldn't do it.

Agreed...Empire is a shining example of this easy-in, easy-out policy, and I would say a large chunk (if not a majority) of folks who get Anathema'd end up going this route (meltdown/whine/OOC/delete).

So long, and thanks for all the fish!

(anathema) enemy to the Empire. No other cabal is like that. If you're not too good at being a Maran or Trib, your ex-cabalmates don't turn on you and hunt you at every occasion.

But even then, demotions in Empire don't happen with the frequency they should.

nt

The problem with anathema is not that you get new enemies. It's that you loose powers and allies and get nothing instead. Most loose any aim to play further. Same will be with the booting people from other cabals. You can imagine that some will add something to their role and keep trucking for some time. But let's be realistic most will just drop the character and reroll.

In my personal experience,
a) Empire don't actually hunt you as anathema.
b) some other cabals actually do hunt you if you turn from them.

That's not to say that this is always the case, but certainly what you'd presented is not always the case.

You're talking about the exceptions. What Forsaken said is what generally happens--as in, what actually occurs in the game the majority of the time.

People wil always whine if they don't get what they want. The reason is secondary.

>Like app said later in the thread, just boot the bad or
>ineffectual apples.

Take Fortress for example. Say you spam induct everyone who applies. Now you have 58 members and the next-most populated is outlander at 39. Maybe 4-5 of those are actually really bad, so you boot them.

Then what's the standard for booting people? If a fortress guy has just kind of blah RP, shows up for raids if the odds aren't too horrible, and gets an evil pk once in a while, but is just not that great, do you boot him to make room for an unknown?

Or are you just figuring that it's fine if one cabal just accumulates an enormous mass of bodies even if they're not that good?

people stop rolling chars to get into a specific cabal if that cabal is pretty full. It kind of works itself out in that only the serious ones will even attempt it.

But if I'm leading Maran and I can check the number of pks using whatever that one command is, I'll check it every two weeks and if it looks like someone isn't moving up from the lowest tier, I'll probably boot them. Just because you want to be a Maran doesn't mean you get to be. Maran is for evil-killers. Bad-asses. I'll boot you, kindly, and give another guy a chance.

If I'm leading Outlander and I see a guy that's generally not wanted (depending on the branch), doesn't kill Imperials or Tribs, doesn't raid either, and doesn't help defend...see ya later.

For one, I never go to cities.

For two, I don't play Damn the man Outlanders who challenge authority. it just doesn't exist to them.

>But if I'm leading Maran and I can check the number of pks
>using whatever that one command is, I'll check it every two
>weeks and if it looks like someone isn't moving up from the
>lowest tier, I'll probably boot them. Just because you want
>to be a Maran doesn't mean you get to be. Maran is for
>evil-killers. Bad-asses. I'll boot you, kindly, and give
>another guy a chance.

So you're saying newbies have to be uncaballed? I think that sucks.

It's Maran, man. Maran. To me, being a full Maran is equivalent to getting Shokai's tattoo. Wtf would he ever tat someone just for trying to kill evil? You gotta be successful.

Same with Scions. To make up for being a lousy pk'er, you better have dang good rp and be pretty focused and useful to ever be a Scion. No lapdogs here. No mascots either.

Just like a newbie isn't going to get Vindicator or an Elite spot in Empire, some cabals can't have newbs. Gotta have some bad-assery.

>It's Maran, man. Maran. To me, being a full Maran is
>equivalent to getting Shokai's tattoo. Wtf would he ever tat
>someone just for trying to kill evil? You gotta be
>successful.

We weren't talking about full maran. A squire still has to be inducted and take up a spot, even if they can't get a lot of evil PKs. Incidentally, I also don't think getting full maran should be like getting Shokai's tattoo. Maybe back in the day, but not now. It's the only good align cabal.

>Same with Scions. To make up for being a lousy pk'er, you
>better have dang good rp and be pretty focused and useful to
>ever be a Scion. No lapdogs here. No mascots either.

That I'm fine with. Scion is supposed to be elite. Not Maran though.

>Just like a newbie isn't going to get Vindicator or an Elite
>spot in Empire, some cabals can't have newbs. Gotta have some
>bad-assery.

That's different. You can be a newb in tribunal and do just fine, or empire. Maybe you don't get elite (but you will eventually if you just play consistently and don't do anything too retarded). Most cabals are newbie friendly. That doesn't mean most cabal positions are newbie friendly, just the basic induction.

Maran is supposed to be a reward for being experienced and active in the cabal. If you're an obvious newbie, then you might just have to deal with being a squire. If you're a really proactive squire, show yourself regularly, help out when possible and learn as best you can, then you'll get maran too. Just not as quickly as the experienced/active player.

Basic induction for any cabal (excluding Scion) should be relatively easy and newbie friendly. Gaining status and position in those cabals should come with time and effort.

If you aren't putting in the time and effort, then you should get kicked out. Because not putting in the time and effort obviously means you don't really care. I'd take ten newbies who care about roleplay and putting in effort and being a constant presence, than one or ten experienced players who are just going through the motions.

One of my first characters. I think it was my second REAL character. All I did was answer a bunch of questions. I couldn't PK for ####... but I sure had the "GO TEAM GOOD" attitude. Drakenhoffen was his name.

No no no. It was my first hero. That's what it was.

nt

a) Because you trotted out something the cabal leader has heard a dozen or so times before? Something unoriginal that got the other 12 guys in? And the cabal leader is not minded to take in a clone of your other characters?
b) Because lots of other people are wanting the same places in the cabal, so the leader needs to distinguish between them? And those other people have probably also been in the cabal before.
c) Because the alternative is the leader speaks with characters that delete as soon as they hit a set-back.

Ultimately, you'd be complaining no matter what, if you didn't get in.

Your C) especially annoys me. So what if they delete? Who cares. That's pretty selfish and petty.

If your interview process was streamlined it wouldn't be a big strain. I can interview someone in 5 minutes and know if I'll induct them or not. The rest is just flavor.

If you are going to require recommendations, there's no reason to ask them for their life story a third time. Just ask them a question or two and induct them. If they screw up big time, uninduct the ones that recommended them.

It's gotten real bad when you can't get inducted normally before 30. It's SUPPOSED to happen around 15-20. Not 20-40. That's why all the helpfiles say level 15 and not level 25.

My FAVORITE characters got inducted within 20 hours of character creation. I typically delete a character that takes too long to get inducted. The competition of more fun things is too great now-a-days. I have 16 other games I can occupy my time with.

I sort of agree with the original poster that "interviews" are often not very useful. I also agree that they make it more difficult to get to the fun stuff, but as a general rule, I don't have a problem with that. For instance, requiring battle apps to have a mage kill first strikes me as a really good thing, despite the fact that it makes it "more difficult" to get into the cabal.

With regard to Fort, here's what I would typically want to see:

1. For Maran wannabes, I want to see someone who is proactive about hunting. Like, when they're online, they should spend a good chunk of their time hunting evil, and not be constantly exploring or farming really-tough-to-get gear.

2. I want to see someone who has at least a minimal level of role-play. That is to say they should have "some" history for the character, and they should be able to interact with me for 5 minutes without coming across as obviously OOC.

3. For Maran wannabes, I want to see a minimal level of PK ability. Usually this translates to "have you killed one evil person". Sort of like the Battle requirement. I wouldn't even mind seeing this part become automated in some fashion.

4. I want to see some evidence that the person's desire to join the cabal, at least IC, has more depth than just, "I want to kill evil people, and joining your cabal buffs me up so I can do that better."

5. Ideally I want to know that the guy takes his good-aligned-ness seriously, and won't chuck it out the window the first time it becomes inconvenient. That is to say, he's not going to kill good mobs for gear. He's not going to kill random neutral characters (outside of extenuating circumstances) just because he can, then lie about it to Fort leadership (see: Jeqo).

6. I would prefer not to induct people who enjoy "griefing" people, even if they're only going to be "griefing" enemies of my cabal.


The only ones of those I can get in an interview are #2, #3 and #4, and honestly almost everyone but the greenest newbie will meet those criteria. The others don't become evident until someone is already in the cabal, and even then are often hard to verify.

If you have 20 people going for 1 or 2 spots, I don't see how you can fairly judge off a 5 minute interview.

But if I had to, I can tell you right away my judgement would be "I'm not inducting the guy who just trotted out the same kind of role as the one I've heard 50 times before".

Taking longer over it is to some people's advantage.

The thing is, if you delete over a set-back, someone else who would have stuck with it missed out on a spot because of you.

A fair-weather player doesn't deserve to be caballed over one who takes the downs as well as the ups, if you can only take one of them, all else being equal.

There's nothing stopping said person from just simply not logging in during bad times. You can't change this and you sure as hell can't decide on the front end if this person is going to do that or not. Sometimes I just simply lose interest in a character and don't feel like doing the grind that is CF. So I play solitare on my computer or Civ4 or something that isn't CF. But I come back to that character.

CF is about fun and people seem to forget that. Spamming up skills is retarded and I feel across the board skill improvement rates should be buffed up a bit. This isn't Everquest. Along the same token, lengthy induction processes should be removed as well. It's already hard enough to catch the leader(s) when they are online. Now I have to catch them online two or three times, which can take up to two weeks. It's gotten to the point where I go to the immortal induction first because it will be more rewarding, more fun, and simply faster.

While I don't mind the "village applicant" thing, I think it's fine... until I start playing at a late time when of the 18 people online only ONE is on my PK list and that person is myself. What I don't like is the fact that it advertises to everyone "I'm an easy target!" and thus I think the title part should be removed. This wouldn't be a problem if the length of time to induction was shortened. The recomendation process can lengthen this a lot if the first villager you see is the commander/drillmaster.

Induction comes down to 3 things.

1) Do you have a role? Does said role explain your class and class specific choices and does it explain why you are standing here speaking to me? This takes at most 3 questions to discover. I can usually cover it in one.

2) Do you know the code of ethics for the cabal? This is roleplay and is necessary if you aren't playing easy in / REALLY easy out (which might be fun if someone actually did the easy out stuff). This stuff is semi-transient too.

3) Do you know the cabal duties and how to perform them? This is purely mechanical but it's necessary. I don't care if you know where the cabals are located. You can find that out later. Every standard joe knows where they are and the days of when they move the entropy cabal and uninduct you for not being able to find it are over. What I need you to know is do you know how to raid? Do you know how to affect the veil? Do you know how to call on the powers? Do you know which person on the inside to give the items of power to? Do you know how to choose which path in the village you will take? Mechanical stuff. Infact, I can tell you all of this after I induct you.

I don't care if you can't pk for ####. I don't care if when I raid I'd rather you stay at the cabal and not get yourself or the others killed. It's all about the fun stick and what can I do to make the level on it read higher. Hell, in all honesty I don't care if you die in a raid or not. Keep dying and you'll either learn how to not die or you'll con-die. If you are having fun... cool!

There's a lot of horrendous role play out there... but at least they try and they are having fun so I will just relax and let them have fun. That is afterall the whole point of this.

I'm afraid my opinion of induction is more informed.

You seem to ignore the fact that NOT EVERYONE CAN GET INTO A CABAL in most cases. This is not up to the cabal leader. Where a cabal has too many members, imms normally step in to stop it growing to a point where it will be unbalanced. Empire and trib are about the only cabals where I've not known this to happen.

You seem to think that a cabal full of people who won't leave the cabal is just as good as a cabal full of people that go out and do stuff. Unfortunately, people who lead cabals tend to disagree, and where they have to make choices, chose the latter kind. The less you do for your cabal, the less point there is in the cabal having you. That's not an issue if there's no limit on members (assuming they meet your criteria), but otherwise it is.

Especially if your cabalmates are getting a rough time and need someone who will actually be there for them.

What ever man. This type of thinking kills the fun of the game. That's my argument. Take it or leave it.

And for the record, I've hit that limit with my leaders as well. I still stand by my argument. I'd rather have a bunch of people having fun than a jack ass who can play and PK and help win the cabal wars.

I said I was better INFORMED. Not better.

And if you read on, you'd have seen (in NICE BIG LETTERS) that IT IS NOT UP TO THE CABAL LEADER AS TO WHETHER THEY CAN INDUCT EVERYONE in many cases.

But hey, whine about me saying I'm elite if that makes you feel better.

Then explain to me how you choose who you take into that last slot?

The first guy you see?

That's exactly how I chose.

*** Edited to add ***

By the first in line I mean the first one to send me a missive. There was one guyI broke this rule on because he was role playing a giant ranger who couldn't write so I inducted him anyways (probably wasn't supposed to, but what were they going to do? Fire me?)

... who can't play much? Like "App" on this thread?

When you keep changing the posts I respond to after I've written mine. Heh.

Seriously though, I don't think first come first serve is better than judging on commitment. (Note that I haven't at any point said pk ability is essential, which is why calling me elitist is misplaced.)

The elitest thing came from you demanding my credentials. It works off the argument that your opinion is better than mine because of your life experiences. I disagree with that argument and so I refuse to participate in it. I will not compare the size of my e-penis with anyone. At that point the debate ceases to be about the content and becomes a pissing contest.

But really, it's not that serious. Right now with the shrunken player base and the gigantic pendulum swings, the number of players in a cabal ISN'T going to affect anything. If they wanted to fix it, they'd make the cabal inner and outer have more HP but do less damage. That would loosen it up so there's more raiding and less item holding and make it so that a pre-30's character could actually participate beyond grabbing disarmed weapons. There would be a dynamic system that is more capture the flaggy which is the way CF is built. Even back in the old days when you were completely dominated you could still hit the guardian to make them pick up the item long enough for you to throw up your powers and put up a fight. Woe to the newbie on item detail...

As it stands right now, a different cabal dominates at a different time of the day and I don't see how one single slot in a cabal is going to change anything. Especially considering that LOTS of people log in at unusual hours just to catch the leader. If it was a real problem, they would hardcode cabal numbers. In the end it is us the players that make the game and if you are limiting my fun by saying I can't join the club that my character was built around joining, then you've just made me waste 20-80 hours of my time. You can only bum me out so many times before I just completely lose interest. Which is at the heart of my original argument.

Your method has value and merit. It's a fine way to do things. The delima we are talking about is one that decent leaders stress over because leaders have two-fold duty. One to RP and the other to the Playerbase.

But in the end it's about what is fun, and me getting inducted is fun. Me being outnumbered 10 to 1 is STILL fun. (I actually LIKE those odds because it means I get lots of fights.) Me being on the side with 10 is STILL fun because I can explore and find those sweet shinies. But me not being able to get inducted when my character was built around the hope of being inducted is NOT fun. Me wasting 50 hours to turn to page 3 on my character is NOT fun. Right now with the mentality of the Mud, half of my role ideas are pointless to try because they simply take too long to develop. So I run with simple cookie cutter throw-aways. They require less input and the hurt from not achieving goals is less because I didn't have any goals in the first place. Which is again at the root of my argument. It comes to expectations. We all put in time in this game and we all want the same thing out of it. So anything that raises the fun stick is good. Anything that lowers it is bad.

Also for the record, Trewyn had to use time based inductions so those people who didn't play often had a fair shake at getting inducted. I didn't like it. But I wasn't smart enough to come up with anything better. I flat out ignored that rule though when I came across people who could RP well or that I accidentally gave a retardely difficult "quest" to do. They got in and if Thror didn't like it he could kiss my fuzzy white arse. It was at the request of a few other villagers that I started the recommendation process. At the time I thought it was because that was the way it had always been done and there was a certain push from the inside to "do things the way we are used to". But in the end I realized that Gungnir and Hyshrawr specifically realized that I was completely swamped with inductees and just wanted to help. But Trewyn was a detail guy, so he tended to overthink as much as he possibly could. And a LOT of people didn't know that I had been asked to stop inducting people. They simply didn't understand it and I couldn't say "there's no room in the village" because I didn't want the flow of inductees to stop. I had to shut the gates twice. Once to berserkers because I personally wanted more defenders (even though it was a ploy, I still inducted berserkers) and a second time because Thror asked me to slow down on the inductions.

In the end, I don't think a time based induction system is a suitable solution to the problem. It sounds like a bandaid to me.

>There would be a dynamic system that is more
>capture the flaggy which is the way CF is built. Even back in
>the old days when you were completely dominated you could
>still hit the guardian to make them pick up the item long
>enough for you to throw up your powers and put up a fight. Woe
>to the newbie on item detail...

I remember that. Oh man. Sucked so bad. It was fun stumbling upon cabal items in random places when the last person would log off and drop it in a non-descript room.

____________________________________________


For me, this induction issue is worst with Ragers. I love playing Ragers but hate playing applicants. The Truesight at 25 is a really, really useful update but the "Village Applicant" title hurts a little too. Having no teleport, no recall, and no safe haven to run to and rest after fighting is really painful. Any other cabal I don't mind being an pledge for a long time.

I was thinking about this problem some more trying to think of possible solutions. What cabals have the over crowding problem? Ragers? Empire? Fortress? Maybe more cabals need a multi-tier system like Fortress and Empire and limit the total number of upper tiers of the cabal rather than total members of every tier. Add an automatic demotion back to basic membership for inactive characters when the limit is near max. This way, lower tier members can compete for those slots but they're still in the cabal albeit with limited powers.

Then again, this may not help with the whole reason they put in the limits in the first place. I know I hate having a hard time getting inducted into Ragers a lot more than getting ganged by a horde of hero Ragers. For some people, the opposite is the case. People used to cry about "the pendulum" regularly.

Hutto, the Sleepy Nitpicker

I didn't demand your credentials when you called me elitist. I asked after which cabals you've led that had caps. You've now answered. So thanks.

However, I guess we just differ in that when the village is full, you would induct on a first come first serve basis, and I'd induct on a who seems to try most and contribute most (and by inference, want it most).

nt

when at their limit?

I just don't believe you did first come first serve as leader of a cabal like that without imms putting a stop to it.

Generally speaking, the population of a cabal and it's respective hard/soft limits do not seem to be as big of a factor as I think you're making it out to be.

The obvious exception is Scion, which you seem to think every cabal is like, or so it seems.

I've been inducted into Fort, Nexus, Outlander, Tribunal, AND Scion in the last year and a half or so and I don't think I spent more than a few days as an applicant for any of them, and never needed more than one interview (excluding mandatory recs). I also don't think my RP was anything more than average. So FWIW, you're take on being a leader, while valid, seems less lenient than most. That isn't a bad thing, especially for a serial Scion player, I guess.

Battle
Outlander
Warlock
Scion

I also imagine that it is currently an issue for fortress (given the already high membership and very high number of applicants).

So no, I am not assuming that all cabals are like scion. The difference is that scion is like that almost all the time. The other cabals are sometimes like that.

But people only tend to complain when they are trying to get into one of those cabals at one of those times. Because the rest of the time, the leaders are not making people jump through all those hoops.

Warlock? I wasn't even bothering to consider cabal structure, "best practices", or demographics from almost a decade ago.

The problems I'm talking about affect ALL cabals SOMETIMES. It comes and goes with the swing of the pendulum and the fact that some cabals are simply more popular.

That said, to me, it felt like you were saying something that made perfect sense for Scion (or any cabal in what I think is a non-regular scenario) and applying it to all cabals.

Just like to wholeheartedly agree with the ending of that statement, it's pretty much my whole view on CF.
Then again, cabals are not entirely necessary to have fun either. Uncaballed does have its perks.

My only problem with point A is that sometimes the leader WAS the person who recited the textbook drivel to get in, and then hypocritically holds others to a standard they didn't feel like holding themselves to on the way up.

The other issues that while some leaders would argue point A is bad, I've been in interviews before where the interviewing leader basically demanded to hear the carbon-copy beaten-to-death Fortress metaphors, and nothing else, before inducting me.

Aside from that, what you're describing sounds like fitting Scion policy, but not necessarily all cabals. I'm sensing a pattern.

I'm tired of explaining why.

The easy in, easy out method is how it should be. It's a game.

If a cabal is full already because it was easy in for everyone else before you wanted to get in, and none of them screws up.

Are you basically saying that cabal membership limits should all be removed? Have you ever complained about the bandwagon effect? I presume you know that sometimes those limits are used to curb bandwagoning?

Most people get bored when their cabal is in power too long, and they subsequently delete.

Take a poll on it if you'd like to get some actual results.

When I say easy in, easy out... I don't mean spend five minutes and induct the guy. What I'm getting at, is the people who spend 30-40 minutes, and sometimes spending even an hour to interview someone, and then they make them go do some menial task. Then you have another conversation, which usually results in being preached at (if you're the applicant) rather than having a two sided roleplay conversation.

If a person seems to have a decent background, knows what direction they are heading in, has at least the basic understanding of what the cabal is, then they deserve induction.

To add another point to cabal limits...I'd be willing to bet a "larger than you think" volume of people who are either A) Have a character in a cabal already or B) Pledged to a cabal...already have other active characters somewhere else. I find it hard to believe that every cabal has nearly 20+ active characters each (excluding Scion: special case). Point is, cabal limits are worthless and the cabal numbers don't accurately represent the number of active players in that cabal.

The whole people get bored and delete when in power.

People don't do that. People in power enjoy the game as sharks on others. They enjoy perks because they beat said others.

If players in power are deleting, I'd like to see some examples.

I remember my biggest character. And the only times I thought about throwing in the towel was when we were getting waxed.

Let's not illusion ourselves to think we are all underdogs, because that just is not the case.

People may not delete when they are initially in power. But if a cabal is regularly on the upswing, and generally destroying the opposition entirely, the non-leadership people start getting bored by about week two or three. Then they start deleting. I'm not saying it is an instantaneous occurrance, where Fortress is killing everyone for a couple days and people get bored. It does take time. But it always balances itself out in the long run.

...was probably the second easiest/best induction I've ever had (Thrakazhaar was still the best, didn't even write a note to the village or get any rec's ).

I let Daurwyn know I was interested in Scion at 34-35 or so. Talked to him about wands, ancient info, secrets, etc. He asked me to help raid a few times, saw I wasn't a chump and inducted me. And then said I'd have to fight to keep my spot.

It was great. Just lost the character somewhere along the way and started playing my first Nexun.

That scion was not near it's limit when Victoria first became leader, and also for significant periods after. But yeah, I'm not aware of anyone having actually accused any of my leaders that I make induction a chore. Any feedback has been positive (although in most cases there's none). Which is why it amuses me here to see people here calling me an elitist prick who wants to make the game unfun.

They don't seem to realise that it is possible to assess dedication, rp, and the like without doing all the stuff they hate. But at the same time, I wouldn't have inducted you just because you rp'd for 5 minutes.

The other thing I notice some apps who consider themselves to be quality are really bad at, is rp'ing AT someone, not with them. There's nothing worse than seeing an encounter which is all about someone playing out their role completely ignoring the context that they are in, and the rp of the others around them.

That even though this is a text based game, there are still first impressions. Socially, first impressions take roughly three seconds to formulate. If you get a good feeling for a person right away, chances are, you should listen to your gut. Of course, this can work against you too, should you get a bad first impression.

Sort of sounds like the direction you took in this case?

You are equating what I am saying here with something that has happened in the game?

Ultimately, I'm happy to be judged by what I do in game. Don't blame me if you don't like long interviews. Don't blame me if you don't like set quests. Don't blame me if you don't like being ignored. None of this is what I'm espousing.

Know how annoying you find having to interview twelve times? Put yourself in the position of a leader. You have to do all that interviewing...with a single character. Lots of times only to have the guy delete shortly after being inducted.

Usually the point of requiring interviews is just to filter out the people who aren't really serious.

I don't typically approach a cabal half assed. But I hate applying for jobs.

So what's your solution?

Nexus usualy works too. At least for me it was one question and killing villager while helping to retrieve for Rhyme.

I meant a global solution. How would this guy suggest Fortress, Battle and Scion induct and/or promote their applicants.

dfbndfb

How would you decide which of the many applicants to accept into the 1 remaining slot available in your cabal?

And it was my answer exactly to it. Yes, I know that there are some peeps like you and most of the Imms who don't like this idea. And I'm fine with it. But it's still my solution 1 hour interviews are retarded. Especialy if only one side likes it(not to mention that sometimes and I think quiet often it's both sides who don't enjoy it at all)

But I would ask thatpeople in those slots consider that I might not have 2 hours a night IRL to do things like this or consider that it's a game and a real life interview for a job that's going to last you your life time rarely lasts more than 30 mins.

Given that our character's lives are accelerated, I would appreciate if the interviews were too.

I just assume if it's a long drawn out process the interviewer is more about control than fun and tend to move on.

>But I would ask thatpeople in those slots consider that I
>might not have 2 hours a night IRL to do things like this or
>consider that it's a game and a real life interview for a job
>that's going to last you your life time rarely lasts more than
>30 mins.

Your job interview experience is a lot different tha mine.

Find 3 other fast food workers and have them email me a recommendation. Then I will wait to see if you show any signs of frustration with this and antagonize you until you quit. After that I will say, I have this interview process to weed out people like you.

When I quit my job I will take out an ad in the paper and bitch about how Burger king ganged us down.

If there's only one job for a fast food worker, and 5 applicants, how do you decide which you give it to?

Now take into account that the quality of that prospective employee is going to make the difference between whether the competition come and clean out all my supplies and make off with my kitchen equipment, or not.

This is a game. you can fire an applicant you don't like and not be sueed for it or starve his family.

Induct them, boot them.

Why dude A should be inducted (and potentially not screw up) instead of dudes B, C, D, E, F, G, H, I, J, K, L, M, N, O, P etc.

Can you not see how it would be unfair to just induct the first guy that comes along? One of the others might be better, and under your process wouldn't get a chance to demonstrate that.

>Why dude A should be inducted (and potentially not screw up)
>instead of dudes B, C, D, E, F, G, H, I, J, K, L, M, N, O, P
>etc.
>
>Can you not see how it would be unfair to just induct the
>first guy that comes along? One of the others might be
>better, and under your process wouldn't get a chance to
>demonstrate that.

Then I would hand-pick sets of 3 applicants of very specific classes and levels and instruct them to level together when I induct them. Frequently.

Essentially for me to justify thinking about being as anal retentive about it as you are, I'm going to start building mini-permas to get them to hero as fast as possible, whether they want to or not, so I can a) have help at hero to kill people and raid and b) see whether or not they are going to become speedbumps at hero and delete.

Anything else doesn't justify this level of thought regardless of how many positions are open and how many people there are. Unless I know the bard is a toolbox who can't even use 'group' to monitor his groupmate's HP and likes to overspam songs, the support class is probably getting in over his more competent offensive peer who is going to be stuck in the midranks forever.

This is why your level of anxiety over this example is wholly flawed, without even taking into account interview length or detail.

I don't need Tanith or mid-ranks Humbert to get my cabal business done. I need someone who will hit 47, be around when I am, and is used to fighting against groups that may slightly outnumber us. I need people who are absolutely monstrous in a pair.

No matter how good Humbert is, if he's 35 or 40 he's useless to the cabal, lowbie retrieval be damned.

Additionally, the people whose groups I handpicked and instructed to level, even if they don't say a thing while ranking, will have fonder memories of that character and who was in the cabal, than the knuckle-dragger who often logs in when there's no one to rank with, spends his time building his set or getting assassinate up, and half the time more than likely won't be able to retrieve anyway due to a multitude of varying circumstantial factors. If I'm losing CON because they've been in the midranks for a week, they don't need to be in the cabal.

Now, it is tantamount to asking 'Are you gay?' on employment applications, to even hint at asking an applicant 'How quick do you *plan* on levelling?' But if I could, and I'm a cabal leader, that's what I'd be asking so I can angle for a 5-7 man presence at all timeslots in levels 45-51.

Which if obtainable would break most cabal balances, but it's what I'd be aiming for to justify that level of anal retentive interviewing.

Bard Repertoire Clarifications:
http://forums.carrionfields.com/dc/dcboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=6&topic_id=23735&mesg_id=23735&page=

I didn't say "induct on pk ability". I didn't say "must optimise pk ability".

I said "someone who will help out at the tougg times". Someone with some dedication.

I've inducted plenty of newbs over the years, including into scion.

I've also never said that long interviews are good.

I simply don't agree that rp'ing for 5 minutes in an interview should get someone inducted if someone else is better rp'd, more dedicated, and will contribute more the the cabal. But apparantly I'm wrong in your eyes.

That my logic wouldn't result in inducting that assassin that level sits? But theirs would?

That you would be complaining if:
- There were 20 applicants for a cabal with 19 spaces.
- The other 19 guys got there first (because you say you can't play often).
- You are clearly much better than those other guys
- They don't screw up, so they stay in
- You don't get a place even though you are clearly much better than them
- You see them logging off when things get tough, and you get ganked as a result

And even if one of these guys DID get booted, if you are not on much, you probably won't be the guy that replaces them. Under your theory, whoever is first to that 5 minute interview should get it.

Trust me... I used to work in fast food. When it comes down to a decision like that, they go with eye candy cause it really doesn't matter who pushes the button on the fry vat. It's not like it's skilled labor. Besides, they are probably a stoner or some kind of addict and will fire themselves sooner or later and you can call the next piece of eye candy on your list.

What you have to remember is that CF is competing for players against other games. When my Rager applicant with 4 mage kills over 60 hours spent frequently playing during low player hours was told by the leader to go out and kill another 3 or whatever, I let my character autodelete and played TF2 for a couple of months.

You're trying to say the cabal leader's hands are tied. I think the others in this thread are trying to say that maybe the system could be made better. Personally, I think the idea of having to be online at the same time as one other specific person is not good. I don't like empowerment. And these days (due to my sometimes odd online hours) I don't really care for cabal inductions either. I think empowerment should become automatic and followers monitored for RP somehow. I don't really know how to fix cabal induction. More people who could induct was a good idea. Too bad so many cabals still lack more than one leader for weeks at a time. I think the introduction of the pledge system was also a good thing. I hate just pointing out flat tires without offering a spare, but I don't really know how to fix the problem.

Edited to add: Think of it this way. If someone is spending 4 hours online every single day (which is a lot to me considering work, school, families) there are still 20 hours every day when they're not online.

Hutto, the Sleepy Nitpicker

I doubt he'd have said that leaders have a "hard on" for doing it. He'd have said that the system needs changing.

Then there's Trewyn, who seems to think that first come first serve is fair. But you can be sure that if a cabal was full simply because really crap people got there before him, but not quite crap enough to get booted, he wouldn't like that he can't get in as a result of it being filled indiscriminantly.

Basically what he's saying is he wants to be in a cabal without any major effort (fine). However, his solution wouldn't necessarily achieve that result. It will only achieve that result if he parks a character after posting a note and then hardly ever plays it. Which is not really fair on the applicant that has played a character and done a lot for a cabal whilst playing because they are actually trying.

Doesn't make a difference if a cabal is full. It only makes a difference when a cabal is empty.

And whilst I am saying that often a leader's hands are tied, I'd still not induct someone that I thought was a jerk. e.g. Fernufeyia.

Meaning what? Fort still requires preliminary interviews before speaking to a leader, but those interviews are super-short? Fort drops the preliminary interviews altogether? Just curious what you'd suggest.

Isildur ===> Fort still requires preliminary interviews before speaking to a leader, but those interviews are super-short?

This cracks me up. I haven't had an interview less than 1 hour long in recent memory. Maybey this is changed, but I some how doubt it as the same people still play fort.

Anyway, I'm done on this thread. My anon status is expired.

I wasn't saying short interviews are the current norm, I was asking if that's what you would PROPOSE become the new norm.

The "Interviw" for me is if I like someone or not and if they share the views of the cabal. It's not a lecture. it's not an easter egg hunt. It's not a debate.

I won't play Fortress anyway. I associate it with certain behaviors and players I don't like.

"Fort still requires preliminary interviews before speaking to a leader"

No. There is nothing in the helpfile that states any such requirement. This is a player-to-player imposed requirement. It is an outdated method that shovels responsibility off of the leader.

I must have been horribly unclear, because nobody seems to have understood what I was saying in that post. I was asking how he proposed to change fort induction, then throwing out a couple of hypothetical examples. Here's what I said:

> Meaning what? Fort still requires preliminary interviews before
> speaking to a leader, but those interviews are super-short? Fort
> drops the preliminary interviews altogether? Just curious what
> you'd suggest.

Read this as:

Meaning what? Would you suggest A? Or would you suggest B?

Where:

A = "Fort (and by 'Fort' I mean 'Fort mortal leadership') continues to require preliminary interviews, but they're super-short"

and

B = "Fort (and by 'Fort' I mean 'Fort mortal leadership') drops the preliminary interviews altogether".

People play the game to have fun. Not brown nose the leader and suck cock.

At least take the time to talk with a person (i.e. five minutes) and find something out about their roleplay. If you want to give them a task, do it based on their role. Placing blanket side quests for every applicant is lame, and shows no creativity, and very little roleplay on the leader's part.

You're a leader. Get the sand out of your twat, and step up your game and interact and roleplay with everyone. Not just the people who you think deserve it.

If you can't abide that, then get the #### off the toilet.

Leaders want to have fun too. Spending all my time interviewing people, every time I log in, would not be fun.

I think if your requirements were imposed on all leaders, that nobody would ever accept leadership positions in cabals that currently use interviews. Or they'd just rubber stamp every single applicant, in which case you should just automate the application process like it is for Empire.

>People play the game to have fun. Not brown nose the leader
>and suck cock.
>

At no point have I said you should do either. Although you have to take into account that a particular leader's rp might demand it.

>At least take the time to talk with a person (i.e. five
>minutes) and find something out about their roleplay.

That's exactly what every leader I've played has done.>

If you
>want to give them a task, do it based on their role.

Sometimes that's appropriate, and sometimes it isn't.

> Placing
>blanket side quests for every applicant is lame, and shows no
>creativity, and very little roleplay on the leader's part.
>

I agree.

>You're a leader. Get the sand out of your twat, and step up
>your game and interact and roleplay with everyone. Not just
>the people who you think deserve it.
>

I agree.


>If you can't abide that, then get the #### off the toilet.

None of the above is inconsistent with what I'm arguing, which is that 5 minutes of rp should not result in the induct button being hit. If that was all it took, you might as well let people induct themselves.

Having been in a cabal before != you get in instantly forever.